GO WITH THE FLOW the natural approach to sustainable flood management in Scotland

A report by

Caroline Davies RSPB Scotland March 2004

GO WITH THE FLOW the natural approach to sustainable flood management in Scotland

Report contents Page

Summary 4

1 Introduction 6 1.1 The current situation 6 1.2 A new opportunity 7 1.3 What is sustainable flood management? 8

2 Flooding in Scotland 10 2.1 A real risk 10 2.2 Responsibilities 10 2.3 Appraisal of flood defence schemes 11 2.4 Flood data 12 2.5 Flood awareness 12 2.6 National Flooding Framework (NFF) 13

3 The new legislative context 14 3.1 Water Framework Directive (WFD) 2000/60/EC 14 3.2 The Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Act 2003 18 3.3 Key amendments to Water Environment and Water Services 20 (Scotland) Bill as introduced

4 Natural systems and soft engineering 24 4.1 Hard engineering: The usual response to flooding 24 4.2 Soft engineering: The alternative 24

5 Catchment thinking: Integration with key policy areas 27 5.1 Local authorities and planning 27 5.2 Agriculture Policy 31 5.3 Forestry 36 5.4 Deer management 37 5.5 Biodiversity Action Plans and the Scottish Biodiversity Strategy 38 5.6 Role of the Scottish Environment Protection Agency 43 5.7 Duty of Scottish Ministers 44

1 6 Case studies 45 6.1 Insh Marshes, Strathspey 45 6.2 The Greater Clyde (South) 48 6.3 Strathearn, Perthshire 52 6.4 Moray Communities 54

7 Conclusions 56

8 Recommendations 57

9 Glossary 60

10 Abbreviations 62

2

“This bill is based on the premise that the environment is integral to the quality of life of every person who lives in this country…… .I will reflect on how the bill has been improved during its passage through committees. We have included provisions that will see the promotion of sustainable approaches to flood management …..we have also made much clearer the bill’s protection of wetlands as an important constituent of the water cycle. The push for sustainable development is now expressly provided for in the bill……………The bill is good for the people of Scotland and for its environment. It is good for the communities who share the environment and the individuals who are involved with it. We are often behind on the implementation of European directives but, for once, the bill is in good time. The result of that work is a bill that will provide us with a platform to protect Scotland’s water environment for generations to come.”

Minister for Environment and Rural Development, Ross Finnie MSP Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Bill, Stage 3 debate, 29th January 2003

3 Summary

“The world we share is given in trust. Every choice we make regarding the earth, air and water around us should be made with the objective of preserving it for all generations to come. That seems to me to be at the heart of the philosophy behind the Bill.”

Minister for the Environment and Rural Development, Ross Finnie MSP Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Bill, Stage 1 debate, 30th October 2002

RSPB Scotland welcomes the introduction of legislation which will transpose the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD)1 in Scotland – the Water Environment and Water Services Act, 2003 (WEWS Act). The Scottish Executive is to be congratulated on the timely introduction of this Act which was considered and passed by the Scottish Parliament. Our evidence, as part of Scottish Environment Link, is acknowledged to have strengthened the Act, which should result in better management and protection of our natural water environment. Scotland now leads the way on implementing this important new Directive.

The rigorous and forward thinking approach of the Parliament’s Transport and Environment Committee in its consideration of the Bill led to a number of key amendments which can change the way we deal with flooding in Scotland. There is now a duty on responsible authorities to promote sustainable flood management. An important link between the role of wetland habitats in tackling flooding problems and helping to achieve the environmental objectives required by the WFD was also established.

The primary legislative framework is now in place and secondary regulations which will detail the practicalities of implementing this new approach are being prepared.

What does this report do? This report outlines the context and background for the new legislation. It suggests a definition for “sustainable flood management” and highlights the opportunities for effective implementation based on better management of catchments and natural ecosystems, and well designed, `soft-engineered’ schemes to tackle flooding.

1 Directive 2000/60/EC establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy

4 It examines the changing policy framework highlighting significant advances, but also hurdles which continue to hold back progress towards more sustainable catchment management.

The potential for sustainable flood management in a number of Scottish catchments with a history of urban flooding problems is assessed. Whilst some proposed flood alleviation schemes are moving towards a more sustainable approach, others are failing to make the necessary shift in design and land use within the catchment.

The study considers inland, riverine flooding. Coastal flooding and the potential for managed realignment around the Scottish coast as a response to sea level rise is highlighted in a RSPB Scotland publication, Seas of Change2.

The report concludes that the public interest is not best served by the current approach to flooding, and challenges the widely held view that flooding is “unpreventable”. A more sustainable, catchment based, approach is needed which allocates public funds towards widespread management of floodplain wetlands. This would provide overall better value for money in terms of expenditure on flood defence, nature conservation, and support to farm incomes.

Key changes to policy and funding of land management schemes are necessary if sustainable flood management is to become a reality in Scotland.

2 Seas of Change: The potential for inter-tidal habitat creation around the coast of mainland Britain, RSPB report 2002

5 1 Introduction

“The Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Bill represents a significant step forward in the co-ordination of sustainable flood prevention measures in Scotland. The river basin management planning process will provide a forum for the discussion of flood-related issues at the catchment level – the most appropriate level at which to consider these issues…..Local authorities will be required to promote sustainable flood management when exercising their function under town and country planning legislation…..development of an area that is exposed to frequent or extensive flooding, for example, the functional floodplain is likely to be unsustainable and should be avoided. If development is essential the threat of flooding should be managed in an environmentally sensitive way that recognises the role of soft engineering techniques – such as natural flood meadows and washlands – in attenuating flooding; where practical the use of existing floodplains should be maximised……In due course the construction of flood defence schemes will require consent in terms of the new control regime on engineering works in and around bodies of water….that is yet another means by which a sustainable approach to flood management is assured…….I hope it is clear to all members that significant steps have been taken, are being taken and will be taken towards addressing flood risk in Scotland in a more sustainable manner”.

Deputy Minister for the Environment and Rural Development, Allan Wilson MSP Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Bill, Stage 3 debate, 29th January 2003

1.1 The current situation Flood management in Scotland is largely reactive and piecemeal – based primarily on flood warnings and hard concrete defences. There has been little attempt to effectively anticipate flooding or to make the most of natural water storage areas. Development has been allowed in high-risk areas with dire consequences and there have been few attempts to plan on a catchment basis. Rivers are commonly divorced from floodplains by embankments which aim to protect agricultural land. Widespread land drainage, unsympathetic forestry practices and the loss of native woodland and peatland habitats have exacerbated erosion and run-off. These factors have affected the capacity of floodplains to function as natural sponges – holding and absorbing water during flood events, then releasing it slowly once the flood peak has passed.

6 This situation reflects the fragmented responsibility for flood management in Scotland. The primary responsibility for flooding lies with individual landowners. In addition, local authorities have duties and powers under the Flood Prevention (Scotland) Act 1961 allowing them to address flood risk to non-agricultural land. The Scottish Executive is responsible for policy relating to river and coastal flooding, and the construction of flood prevention schemes.

“This winter we will again witness major flooding events across the county being tackled with sandbags and canoes. In effect we are asking people to fight a losing battle. We are tackling the symptoms and doing nothing to prevent future flooding events

I have seen at first hand in Perth the utter havoc and hardship that flooding can bring to ordinary people’s lives. In retrospect, it is incredible that we allowed sprawling housing estates such as exist to the north of Perth to be built on natural floodplains. Had agricultural practices further upstream not interfered even further with the natural floodplains, the scale of the flood defence work for Perth could have been much reduced”.

Bruce Crawford MSP Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Bill, Stage 1 debate, 30th October 2002

1.2 A new opportunity The Water Framework Directive redresses the balance on flood management. It requires Member States to achieve ecological standards for waters and to “mitigate the effects of floods”. This gives the impetus to change the way we manage water in a way that protects the environment and people from the damage caused by floods. The new river basin planning system, to be introduced within the next decade, must integrate land use policies - particularly in planning and agriculture - in order to achieve the “good ecological status” required by the WFD and also to contribute to preventing floods. River Basin Management Plans must include flooding within their remit.

The WEWS Act, recently introduced to implement the WFD in Scotland, grasps this opportunity and includes a new duty on Scottish Ministers, SEPA and responsible authorities to promote sustainable flood management.

7 The Scottish Ministers, SEPA and the responsible authorities must – So far as is consistent with the purposes of the relevant enactment or designated function in question – (i) promote sustainable flood management

Water Environment and Water Services Act section 2 (4) (b) (i)

1.3 What is sustainable flood management? The term, newly enshrined in Scots law, is likely to mean different things to different people. RSPB Scotland suggests it embodies a shift from our predominantly piecemeal and reactive approach to flood management and offers the following definition:

Sustainable flood management is achieved by adopting the following elements to manage the risk of flooding: a strategic, catchment based approach protecting and using natural systems and habitats promoting soft engineering techniques

Such an approach can deliver social, economic and environmental benefits and thereby contribute to a sustainable Scotland. It is a cost-effective means of tackling flooding - protecting homes and businesses whilst benefiting biodiversity. A number of sectors have a key role in delivering sustainable flood management:

The Scottish Executive needs to deliver a properly integrated land use/ management policy framework, offer well funded land management schemes which recognise the value of naturally functioning floodplains and upland habitats, and redirect grant-aid towards alternatives to hard flood defences. SEPA will have overall responsibility for delivering the obligations of the WFD through the WEWS Act and has a key role in overseeing River Basin Management, ensuring cost-effective ways of achieving “good ecological status”, commenting on flood alleviation schemes, and operating a new engineering consent regime.

8 Local authorities, particularly planners and engineers have an influential role in the design, promotion and approval of catchment based and soft-engineered flood alleviation schemes. Farmers, landowners and foresters must be convinced of the benefits, financial and otherwise, of this approach in order to practice sympathetic management throughout the catchment. Local communities / business communities which are often the driving force behind flood prevention schemes must be made aware of this approach as it is a considerable departure from conventional flood defence.

9 2 Flooding in Scotland

2.1 A real risk Flooding is a major issue in Scotland and likely to get worse. Perth, Paisley, Elgin, Edinburgh, Dumfries, Kilmarnock, Kirkintilloch and Selkirk have suffered serious flooding in recent years with countless millions of pounds worth of damage to business and residential properties. The Scottish Executive recognises that extensive built-up areas are at risk3; currently, around 170,000 Scottish homes are vulnerable to inland and coastal flooding. Many settlements are located on low-lying floodplains alongside rivers and flat land on the coast. Estimates of annual average damage from flooding are around £20 million – this could rise by 115% by 20804.

The recently published UK Climate Impacts Programme briefing5 concludes that winters will become wetter with more frequent heavy rainfall, while summers may become drier. Floods considered extreme today could become more common in the future. By the 2080s winter precipitation in Glasgow could increase by 20%. In parts of the east coast of Scotland the increase could be as much as 30%. Simultaneously, summer precipitation is projected to reduce by 30% - increasing the risk of flash flooding as water runs off dry ground more quickly. More severe floods are predicted to occur more frequently in the future. A medium climate change scenario predicts that a 1 in 100 chance flood in any year is expected to become a 1 in 70 chance flood in any year by the 2020s, and to a 1 in 40-60 chance flood in any year by the 2080s6.

2.2 Responsibilities The primary responsibility for flood management lies with individual landowners. This has resulted in a particularly uncoordinated approach to flooding in Scotland. In addition, local authorities have duties and powers under the Flood Prevention (Scotland) Act 1961 allowing them to address flood risk to non-agricultural land. The Scottish Executive is responsible for policy relating to river and coastal flooding, and the construction of flood prevention schemes.

3 Scottish Planning Policy 7: Planning and Flooding, 2004 Scottish Executive Development Department 4 Climate Change: Flooding Occurrences Review, Scottish Executive Research, 2002 5 Climate Change Scenarios for the UK, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, 2002 6 Turning the tide on flooding, WWF report, 2002

10 2.2.1 Funding Flood prevention schemes are approved under the Flood Prevention (Scotland) Act 1961. Local councils are required to obtain confirmation by Scottish Ministers of Flood Prevention Schemes before proceeding to construction. Confirmed schemes attract grant funding of 50% from the Scottish Executive. These grants tend to be for large `hard` concrete schemes, often costing more than £250,000.

“I am concerned about flooding…. We hear that we should leave flooding to local authorities. However, local authorities said in evidence that they manage flooding by building concrete defences, but not by taking the long-term and evolutionary measure of mitigating flooding”.

Fiona McLeod MSP Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Bill, Stage 1 debate, 25th September 2002

Investment in flood defence schemes has trebled since 1999, to £40 million over the next 3 years, to reduce flood risk for some 1,850 properties in Scotland’s most vulnerable communities. The 2002 spending review increased the provision for other flood risk management initiatives to £10 million – including SEPA’s Floodline flood warning service, and the funding of digital ground level data to improve flood risk estimation.

RSPB Scotland considers that this money could be better and more effectively spent by implementing soft rather than hard engineered schemes. The emphasis should be on flood management rather than flood defence. The Scottish Executive has recognised this and plans to commission research on the extent of available natural flood storage in certain catchments “such storage is considered as a useful complement to barrier defences and allows for environmentally sustainable methods of flood risk management”. This is most welcome, but if sustainable flood management is to become a widespread reality then funds need to be actively directed towards soft-engineered solutions.

2.3 Appraisal of flood defence schemes Local authorities prepare and submit economic appraisals for proposed flood defence schemes in line with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) Flood and Coastal Defence: Project Appraisal Guidance (PAG) which aims to ensure schemes are technically sound, economically viable and environmentally acceptable. There is currently no Scottish equivalent, but it is

11 intended that the National Technical Advisory Group, established by the National Flooding Framework (see section 2.6) will consider the need for separate Scotland-specific guidance on the design of flood alleviation schemes and economic assessment.

Whilst seeking to avoid environmental damage the DEFRA guidance appears to give little incentive for authorities to seek innovative and sustainable environmental solutions when seeking grant aid for flood defence schemes.

2.4 Flood data SEPA and local authorities use 100-year floodplain maps7 to assess flood risk. These are based on OS ground level data and indicate the depth of water under different flooding scenarios. The maps have limitations - for example, they do not consider the impact of existing development, the extent of coastal flooding or small catchments. They are not robust enough for accurate analysis of flood risk on the flatter coastal strips and floodplains, and inadequate for the forthcoming River Basin Management Plans (RBMPs).

It is widely recognised that more and better information is needed. In March 2003 the Executive announced £420,000 to improve indicative flood risk maps over 30,000 square kilometres of southern Scotland8. A further £1.6 million was made available in October 20039. These will be GIS based elevation data sets which, together with hydrological modelling should allow the production of high quality second generation indicative flood risk maps, essential for the RBMPs and for planning authorities seeking to avoid inappropriate development in flood risk areas.

2.5 Flood awareness SEPA is responsible for promoting awareness of flood risk and operates 42 flood warning schemes across Scotland through Floodline, the service which gives advice on how to prepare for and cope with flooding. The Executive has recently made £1.8 million available to help SEPA improve awareness of flood risks11 for the rivers Clyde, Kelvin and Irvine. These new flood warning schemes aim to give timely warnings of floods to properties at risk in South Lanarkshire, East Dunbartonshire, East Ayrshire and Glasgow. Recent research indicates that the

7 Institute of Hydrology 130 maps 8 Scottish Executive press release 17/3/03 9 Scottish Executive press release 1/10/03

12 majority of Scots living in flood risk areas throughout Scotland have made no preparations for being flooded10.

2.6 National Flooding Framework (NFF) The Scottish Executive set up an ad hoc ministerial committee to consider its approach to flooding following a severe event in Elgin in the winter of 2002. This culminated in a set of commitments presented as a National Flooding Framework including:

improved awareness of the risks of flooding through the provision of better flood risk information and additional flood warning systems - work with SEPA to produce second generation indicative river flood risk maps for completion by September 2004; publish revised national planning policy intended to strengthen the ability of planning authorities to prevent unsuitable further development where there is significant flood risk; £40million over the next three years to reduce flood risk for 1,850 properties; manage flood risk better by improving national guidance and procedures for new flood alleviation schemes - provide improved national guidance for flood alleviation schemes by September 2004; and ensure joint working between local authorities, SEPA and Scottish Water to improve flood risk management - establish a National Technical Advisory Group by November 2003 to provide technical advice to local authorities and others on flood risk - ensure authorities awareness of new duty to consider flood management in river basin management plans by September 2004 - consult councils on improving the work and role of Flood Appraisal Groups by end 2003.

These Executive commitments present an opportunity to promote and implement sustainable flood management in Scotland. The newly established National Technical Advisory Group will be particularly influential.

10 SEPA press release 25/9/03

13 3 The new legislative context

3.1 The Water Framework Directive (WFD) 2000/60/EC The Water Framework Directive is the most significant piece of European water legislation for decades. It aims to establish a coherent legislative framework for the protection of inland surface waters, transitional waters, coastal waters and groundwater across Member States, to include:

preventing further deterioration, protecting and enhancing the status of aquatic ecosystems and dependant terrestrial ecosystems and wetlands; promoting sustainable water use based on long term protection of available water resources; and contributing to mitigation of floods and droughts – a response to the fact that increased flooding across Europe is part of a global pattern of more intense rainy seasons, stronger storms and rising sea levels.

The Directive requires new structures to be put in place, primarily River Basin Districts (RBD). Each RBD will develop a River Basin Management Plan (RBMP) supported by sub-basin plans. The plans will include environmental objectives for water bodies within the RBD. These objectives will be met through specific actions set out in programmes of measures in RBMPs.

14

WFD Transposition and Implementation Timetable

Year Requirement by 2003 transpose requirements to Member States law identify RBDs and Competent Authorities by 2004 undertake RBD characterisation - pressures and impacts upon water status - economic analysis of water use - identify heavily modifies and artificial waters - register of protected areas by 2006 monitoring programmes operational consult on work programme for RBMP by 2007 consult on interim overview of significant water issues in RBD by 2008 publish full draft RBMP for consultation by 2009 publish final first RBMP - environmental objectives - programme of measures - monitoring networks - designate heavily modified water bodies

by 2010 introduce pricing policies by 2012 programme of measures operational by2013 first review of RBMP - characterisation assessments - economic analysis - consult on interim overview of significant water management issues for second RBMP by 2015 achieve environmental objectives of first RBMP publish second RBMP by 2021 achieve environmental objectives of second RBMP publish third RBMP by 2027 achieve environmental objectives of third RBMP publish fourth RBMP

15 New European guidance on the role of wetlands in the WFD11 was recently endorsed by the EU Water Directors. The document highlights elements of the WFD which will help conserve and enhance wetlands and illustrates how wetland functions can help deliver WFD objectives for surface and groundwaters. It is highly relevant to the development of RBMPs and in the promotion of sustainable flood management. In particular:

3.1.1 Linking Environmental Objectives to sustainable flood management The EU recognises that wetland ecosystems are ecologically and functionally significant elements of the water environment, with an important part to play in helping to achieve sustainable development. It accepts that the restoration, creation and enhancement of wetlands can, in appropriate circumstances, offer cost-effective and socially acceptable mechanisms for delivering WFD obligations – in particular, meeting the environmental objectives which will be set for water bodies.

Many wetland ecosystems are composed of mosaics of surface water, permanently and temporarily inundated land – e.g. lowland mires or floodplain wetlands. WFD provisions will help to protect and enhance wetland ecosystems by defining parts of these as water bodies and setting objectives for them where they fall within the categories of rivers, lochs/lakes, transitional or coastal waters.

Where there are human impacts on wetlands which endanger the Directive’s objectives for surface water bodies, these wetlands will need to be protected, enhanced or restored to allow the achievement of the relevant objectives. Identifying such interactions will form an important part of the analysis of pressures and impacts required during the River Basin Planning process.

3.1.2 Achieving `status’ targets The overall aim of the WFD is to protect and improve the water environment by attaining good status – a reflection of biological, chemical and physical criteria for the majority of water bodies in Scotland. Good status is unlikely to be achieved, for example, where there are substantial changes to the flow and velocity of a river; changes of the kind which can result from damage to wetlands within the riparian zone. The mutual dependence of water bodies and associated wetlands should be clearly reflected in the analysis of impacts and pressures and the subsequent risk assessment – both of which are required by the WFD, and

11 Horizontal Guidance on the Role of Wetlands in the Water Framework Directive, EU Common Implementation Strategy, November 2003

16 should help to determine the measures needed to maintain or achieve good status.

Where pressures on the floodplain have resulted in an impact on the status of a river, the restoration of the floodplain to a more natural condition will often be the obvious remedy. Such restoration will form part of a set of basic or supplementary measures to achieve the environmental objectives, unless economic tests within the Directive demonstrate that it is not a practical or economic option.

Some of our best quality aquatic environments will be required to remain at high status. The WFD provides stringent protection for our remaining natural wetland ecosystems where these are hydrologically connected with high status water bodies.

3.1.3 Linking Economic Appraisal to sustainable flood management Economic appraisal features prominently in the WFD and will be an important part of the implementation process. The economic analysis required under Article 5 and Annex III is designed to help Member States choose the most cost-effective combination of measures to achieve the Directive’s objectives. Analysis should contain enough information in sufficient detail to make considered judgements about cost-effectiveness. For instance, it should compare the costs and benefits – including environmental costs and benefits – of measures involving the creation and restoration of wetlands with other options for achieving the WFD’s environmental objectives.

Protection of the environment is often seen as a costly business. However, it is typically considered from the point of view of costs to taxpayers rather than its relative importance to human welfare. Whilst recognising that flood management schemes must primarily protect life and property RSPB Scotland is keen to optimise the wildlife gains from flood defence expenditure. However, there is a major problem in promoting schemes which deliver multi-functional benefits when there may be a cheaper option delivering the same flood defence standard, but a lower level of social and environmental gain. This approach is likely to be short sighted and unsustainable: economic efficiency is achieved when the total of all forms of benefit is maximised.

17 Getting value for money means that schemes should not simply be selected on the basis of priced costs and benefits. Unpriced benefits must be built into the equation – for example, meeting national objectives for biodiversity and sustainability, contributing towards the obligations of the WFD, health and recreational benefits and so on.

Whilst there is widespread consensus that wetlands play a crucial role in a range of functions within catchments there is a dearth of practical tools to assist with their evaluation. The net effect is that the functional benefits provided by wetlands are not properly recognised in the formal process of decision making for flood risk management. Moreover, environmental assets are commonly described as a liability and are often viewed as a constraint upon economic development opportunities rather than as an asset or resource providing multiple benefits for minimal cost to society.

The Environment Agency has recognised the need for robust evaluation techniques to be developed and is currently commissioning work to address this12. Such thinking needs to be applied in Scotland too.

“There is a cost to be paid by not implementing the Bill. “Not only would it lead to a Scotland with a more degraded environment, it would seriously damage our reputation as a country of outstanding beauty with a vibrant and healthy environment. Scotland’s communities and businesses would suffer as a result”

Minister for the Environment and Rural Development, Ross Finnie MSP Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Bill, Stage 1 debate, 25th September 2002

3.2 The Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Act 2003 This new primary legislation transposes the WFD into Scots law and promotes the sustainable management and protection of the water environment in Scotland. This is enabling legislation, written in general terms with much of the specific policy to be implemented via subordinate legislation, or administratively.

The WEWS Act will introduce the statutory RBMPs required by the WFD and associated sub-basin plans which relate to water management by 2009. Both will

12 The development of tools for the multi-functional economic valuation of freshwater wetlands, Environment Agency research proposal, 2003

18 be key mechanisms for achieving the aims of the WFD, and for achieving a more integrated water and land use planning system. SEPA will set environmental objectives for each body of water within each RBMP, and will prepare a programme of measures to achieve these objectives.

“One of the planning instruments that local authorities have not had access to is river basin planning. Certain local authorities could be asked what it is that they want to do and whether they are aware of the implications of flooding. They could be asked whether they are simply moving the problem from one place to another. In the past local authorities have been criticised for doing that and the criticism has been well founded. The problem arose largely as the result of the absence of proper river basin management. That system can act as a driver for the problem of flooding to be considered as a whole. Under that system flooding cannot be said to be a local problem”

Minister for the Environment and Rural Development, Ross Finnie MSP Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Bill, Stage 1, debate 30 October 2002

The Act takes a major step towards sustainable flood management in Scotland. This is particularly notable considering that the original Bill (prior to becoming an Act) omitted to tackle flooding at all.

“The lack of flood management provision in the Bill as introduced was a glaring omission”

John Scott MSP Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Bill, Stage 3 debate, 29 January 2003

The original Bill also failed to recognise wetlands as part of the water environment. However, these issues were a key focus for debate during the passage of the Bill, and the Transport and Environment Committee of the Scottish Parliament was instrumental in securing a number of vital amendments to ensure a new approach to flood management.

19 …..the Committee considers that one of the most obvious ways in which it will be possible to judge whether the WFD has made a difference will be in relation to Scotland’s ability to reduce the incidence of flooding over the coming years. The Committee has taken evidence on – and some of its members have seen for themselves13 the importance that natural wetland systems can have in filtering pollution and controlling flooding. Some witnesses have called for the Bill to explicitly state the importance that should be given to wetlands in meeting these objectives. The Committee agrees with this position and, in recognition of this considers that good and adequately funded agri-environment schemes are necessary.

The Committee considers that river basin management planning will only be judged to have been a success if the number of floods and the amount of damage caused by flooding is reduced over the next two decades. That will be a real challenge given the changes in the global climate. At a practical level the Committee considers it vital for effective flood avoidance strategies to be adopted (rather than concentrating resources on dealing with the consequences of flooding events).

Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Bill, Extract from Transport and Environment Committee Stage 1 report

3.3 Key amendments to Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Bill as introduced

3.3.1 Flooding MSPs recognised the importance of taking this opportunity to promote a more sustainable approach to flood management. A key amendment was made to the Bill in order to make the link between flood management and river basin management planning. Consequently the WEWS Act contains the following general duty:

13 Transport and Environment Committee visit to RSPB Scotland’s Insh Marshes reserve

20 WEWS Act Section 2 (4) The Scottish Ministers, SEPA and the responsible authorities must – (b) so far as is consistent with the purposes of the relevant enactment or designated function in question – (i) promote sustainable flood management, and (ii) act in the way best calculated to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development , (c ) so far as is practicable, adopt an integrated approach by co-operating with each other with a view to co-ordinating the exercise of their respective functions.

In practice this means, for example:

Scottish Ministers will be required to promote sustainable flood management when considering grant applications for flood defence schemes, when planning and determining priorities for agriculture/forestry funding, and in other policy development; local authorities will be required to promote and implement this sustainable flood management provision when exercising their function under the town and country planning legislation; Ministers can stipulate that RBMPs and sub-basin plans must address flood prevention issues; the new River Basin Management Plans and associated sub-basin plans will provide a strategic forum within which flood prevention measures can be considered, bringing together all those with an interest in flood management at a strategic scale – including SEPA, local authorities and NGOs; persons or bodies which appear to SEPA to have an interest in the promotion of sustainable flood management must be consulted; and a catchment based source-to-sea approach will be the basis of sustainable flood management.

21 3.3.2 Wetlands

“It is crucial that Scotland has a uniform objective and basis for tackling the degradation of our water, river basins and wetlands…… We recognise that wetlands play a protecting role in the ecology of the water environment and that the conditions of our wetlands in Scotland vary according to the aquatic ecosystems. We are not ignoring wetlands and we do not intend to exclude them from the scope of the Bill”.

Minister for Environment and Rural Development, Ross Finnie MSP Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Bill, Stage 1 debate, 25th September 2002

The social and economic benefits offered by wetland habitats, as well as their immense importance for biodiversity was recognised by MSPs. Consequently, the Act now defines wetlands as part of the water environment:

WEWS Act Section 3 (4A) “Wetland” means an area of ground the ecological, chemical and hydrological characteristics of which are attributable to frequent inundation or saturation by water and which is directly dependent, with regard to its water needs, on a body of groundwater or a body of surface water.

In practice this means that:

wetlands that are dependent on groundwater bodies, form part of a surface water body or are Protected Areas14 will benefit from obligations to protect and restore the status of the water; pressures on wetlands (e.g. physical modification or pollution) can result in impacts on the ecological status of water bodies. Measures to manage such pressures will need to be considered as part of River Basin Management Plans in order to meet the environmental objectives of the Directive; and wetland creation and enhancement should be used within Programmes of Measures15 to help achieve the environmental objectives set for the associated water bodies.

14 Protected Areas are defined in Annex IV of the WFD, and Section 7 (4) (d) of the WEWS Act and include areas designated for the protection of habitats or species where the maintenance or improvement of the status of the water is an important factor in their protection.

22 “I am pleased that the Executive eventually took on board the idea that wetlands are an important part of water ecosystems and should be explicitly recognised as such in the bill. Wetlands are not just any old piece of land that is wet; they are a recognised and definable feature and perform a number of valuable functions in the ecosystem of which they are part. Those functions include absorbing the peaks of water flows that can otherwise cause flooding; controlling pollution by acting like settling tanks…..;storing nitrogen and phosphorus in the vegetation they sustain; and acting as buffer zones between agricultural land and aquifers used for drinking water. Peat bogs especially can absorb carbon dioxide. Wetlands also provide an important habitat for a wide range of flora and fauna and are important for migratory birds. Finally, wetland vegetation can stabalise shorelines and consolidate soils. Members can see why I was so keen to have wetlands mentioned explicitly as part of the water environment.”

Nora Radcliffe MSP Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Bill, Stage 3 debate, 29th January 2003

15 Programme of Measures will be set out in RBMPs and will detail the actions which will be applied to achieve environmental objectives set for water bodies

23 4 Natural systems and soft engineering

4.1 Hard engineering: The usual response to flooding Most floods have resulted in the construction of flood walls or embankments to move water downstream. Recent examples include the £23 million wall built to protect Perth; the £11 million River Kelvin flood prevention scheme at Kirkintilloch; £9.3 million to support the construction of a flood prevention scheme in East Ayrshire – Crookedholm, Riccarton and Galston (March 2003); £1.6 million to construct a series of flood walls in Rothesay (announced March 2003).

Hard engineering solutions may be perceived as tried and tested, cheaper, easier and quicker to construct than undertaking large scale floodplain management. Such flood defences are a static approach to flood risk management, with a nominal design life of 50 years, a fixed level of protection and further investment required for their maintenance. This is set against the dynamic nature of flood risk, changing climate and land use.

There is a place for hard defence – in certain circumstances there may be no alternative. However, in most cases, tackling the effect rather than the cause of flooding by building increasingly high floodwalls is not an environmentally or economically sustainable option.

4.2 Soft engineering: The alternative Soft-engineered solutions are designed to hold floodwater. Natural floodplains are allowed to flood and wetland habitats such as wet grassland, peatlands, bogs, fens and saltmarsh act like giant sponges to soak up excess water then release it slowly back into the river. This alternative approach is rapidly gaining popularity in the profession. A recent report prepared by the Institution of Civil Engineers for the UK Government16 recommends solutions which encourage the temporary storage of floodwaters and mimic natural systems as desirable ways of alleviating fluvial flooding.

16 Learning to live with rivers: final report of the Institution of Civil Engineers’ Presidential Commission to review the technical aspects of flood risk management in England and Wales, 2001

24 A more natural approach to floodplain management can achieve many objectives:

Flood storage - helps prevent flooding by holding floodwater away from vulnerable urban areas downstream.

Cost savings - less heavily engineered flood defence measures mean long term savings to the public purse.

Biodiversity - contribute towards achieving Biodiversity Action Plan targets for priority wetland habitats and species.

Agriculture - floodplains can be managed productively with grazing on wet areas and arable production in drier areas.

Nutrient storage - retention of nutrients within floodplain habitats can reduce diffuse pollution problems.

Sediment retention - benefits for fisheries which might otherwise suffer from siltation.

Amenity - opportunities for bird watching, walking, fishing, recreation, eco- tourism.

Education - opportunities for education on issues such as engineering, catchment management and biodiversity.

Despite the multi-functional benefits of floodplain management there are few meaningful examples in the UK – Insh Marshes in Strathspey being an obvious exception (see case studies). This contrasts with a number of major schemes in Europe: for example, the Netherlands and Germany have been active in reducing flood risk along the Rhine by setting back flood defences and re-creating floodplain storage areas following serious flooding in 1993 and 1995.

At Bislicher Insel near Xanten in Germany a `retention area’ covering 1,100 hectares capable of holding 50 million cubic metres of floodwater is being created.

25 In Brabant, the Netherlands, a `space for water’ project will restore 706 hectares of washlands and create 100 hectares of new washland, to provide storage capacity for 10 million cubic metres.

Putting these figures into a Scottish context, the 1000 hectare Insh Marshes floodplain can hold 20 million cubic metres when flooded to a depth of 2 metres (see case studies).

A number of recent initiatives may indicate a new approach to flood management in Scotland, in keeping with the tone set by the debate throughout the passage of the WEWS Bill.

Glasgow city centre is vulnerable to flooding in exceptional weather. In a bid to address this, consultants are undertaking a £1 million study to investigate the possible creation of floodplains upstream of Glasgow in North and South Lanarkshire to guard against flash floods caused by heavy rainfall. A further £160,0000 has been allocated to Glasgow City Council to commission a LIDAR (Light Induced Detection and Ranging) survey of the Clyde corridor. This will help develop a catchment wide feasibility study to identify options for addressing flood risk posed to communities around the River Clyde. Edinburgh City Council has determined, subject to a public inquiry, to use the playing fields and park alongside Murrayfield Stadium for floodwater storage, rather than defend with flood walls. This area, which can hold some 90,000 cubic metres of floodwater, is one of few remaining fragments of the Water of Leith floodplain. Floodplanner17 – a practical handbook on sustainable catchment management is being developed for Clackmannanshire Flood Appraisal Group.

RSPB Scotland recognises that soft engineering may not be appropriate in all circumstances. However, such alternative solutions must be actively, and routinely sought as part of a cost-effective solution to flooding problems.

17 Floodplanner – being developed by Mountain Environments for WWF Scotland and Clackmannanshire Council Flood Appraisal Group

26 5 Catchment thinking: Integration with key policy areas

Ministers Question Time - SEERAD: To ask the Scottish Executive what steps it is taking to ensure that there is an integrated approach between the environment and rural development divisions within its Environment and Rural Affairs Department

Minister for Environment and Rural Development, Ross Finnie MSP: I have encouraged closer working between all the relevant interests in my department in order to promote integrated policy development. Examples of that approach include the forward strategy for Scottish agriculture, the work flowing from the “Custodians of Change” report, and our implementation of the Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Act 2003.

The duty to adopt an “integrated approach”18 across land use policy is critical. It is reflected in the aspirational words of numerous recent documents and initiatives, but key changes to policy and funding are required if sustainable flood management is to become a reality.

5.1 Local authorities and planning

5.1.1 Flood defence schemes Local authorities will be required to promote sustainable flood management when proposing flood defence schemes. They will be designated as “responsible authorities”, and their flood prevention functions under the 1961 Flood Prevention Act as “designated functions”. They will be required to secure compliance with the WFD. This is a major opportunity for local engineers, authority engineers and planners to adopt soft-engineered solutions to flooding problems. SEPA also has a key role to play here in commenting on the design of schemes.

18 WEWS Act s(2) (4c)

27 5.1.2 Development plans and River Basin Management Plans - the catchment approach The two-way relationship between the development planning system and the new river basin management plans will be particularly important. Both will have statutory status and will inevitably overlap, so integration between the two systems will be critical. This was recognised during consideration of the Bill in Parliament

“The Committee therefore confers with the RTPI’s recommendation that “the section of the Bill dealing with RBMPs should not only include a duty for others to have regards to RBMPs but also for SEPA to have regard to the statutory land use planning process, both development plans and development control”

Transport and Environment Committee Stage 1 report on Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Bill, 2002

The importance of adopting a strategic approach to flood management involving local authorities across the catchment area, rather than simply where flooding occurs, was highlighted throughout development of the WEWS Act.

Other important ways in which local authorities can contribute to sustainable flood management include the use of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) in new developments and an enhanced role for the Flood Liaison and Advice Group (FLAG). Both make an important contribution to the overall goal, but are outwith the remit of this study.

“In achieving social, economic and environmental goals, and delivering environmental justice, a long term view of flood risk has to be taken…… New development should aim to be in harmony with the water environment and not attempt to work against it.

Scottish Planning Policy 7: Planning and Flooding, 2004

28 5.1.3 The Scottish Executive’s revised policy on planning and flooding SPP719 The Scottish Executive’s revised policy on planning and flooding focuses on the avoidance of risk, though options for the management of flood risk weaken the overall policy direction. However, it aims to force flooding issues to be addressed early in the planning process, rather than reactively through development control as tends to happen now.

It continues to require local authorities to safeguard the capacity of functional floodplains recognising that areas previously developed and behind flood defences are still considered to be functional floodplain and a vital part of the wider flood management system. It also considers that structure plans have a particular contribution to make towards achieving the wider objectives of flood management and the water environment, specifically in relation to River Bain Management Planning under the WEWS Act.

However, the revised policy fails to adequately address the requirement to carry out sustainable flood management as set out in the WEWS Act. In recognition of this the Executive acknowledges that many of the issues will become clearer as implementation of the Act takes place, and that the SPP will accordingly be kept under review. Issues concerning the definition of sustainable flood management are to be progressed by the NTAG on flooding.

5.1.4 COSLA Flooding report The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, COSLA, recently published the report of its Flooding Task Group20 which recognises that the way land within catchments is used and managed has a significant effect on surface water run-off, drainage and flooding. The report highlighted the need for these issues to be addressed as part of a package of measures to reduce flooding, including “fundamental changes to current agricultural and forestry practices” – measures which are outwith the planning system.

19 Scottish Planning Policy 7: Planning and Flooding, 2004 Scottish Executive Development Department 20 COSLA Flooding Task Group, Final Report, March 2003

29 “The agriculture industry has for many years been encouraged to increase the amount of land under productive cultivation. Natural flood storage has been lost as shallow lochs and wetlands have been drained, and ditches and burns have been canalised to improve land drainage. This process must be reversed since the attenuation of flood discharge higher up the catchment by means of flood storage can significantly reduce the peak flood discharge downstream. Opportunities must be taken to re-establish natural lochs and riverside wetlands and to create new flood storage areas, designed to release flood water at a controlled rate. Public open space, football pitches, recreation grounds etc sited close to watercourses can be used for flood water storage in urban areas. This policy will give rise to occasional loss of use of such areas for their primary purpose. It is necessary therefore to educate the general public and those who maintain public facilities as to the importance of their use as flood storage areas. It is also necessary under a lump sum payment to compensate farmers and landowners for commercial loss”

COSLA flooding report, 2003

The COSLA report specifies the following measures to assist with flood alleviation:

creation of flood storage areas within river catchments by taking agricultural land out of use to allow deliberate controlled flooding so as to attenuate the downstream peak flood discharge; managed realignment of watercourses to control flow; use of public open space, football pitches and the like, adjacent to water courses as flood storage areas by allowing deliberate controlled flooding so as to attenuate the downstream peak flood discharge; raise public awareness of the usefulness of controlled flooding in reducing the likelihood of flooding; reverse the practice of improving land drainage for agriculture which results in more rapid run-off into the receiving watercourse; and use Flood Appraisal Groups as a means of achieving collaboration between councils within a catchment so as to achieve comprehensive catchment wide solutions.

The report recognises the significant under-funding of the existing Rural Stewardship Scheme and calls for additional funding to implement these

30 measures. It further recommends the establishment of a high-level standing Flooding Forum to consider the effects of climate and flooding in Scotland and to offer advice to councils and others. It also specifically highlights the need to develop projects which adapt soft-engineering techniques for Scottish rivers – this is seen as essential to satisfy the ecological and environmental requirements of the Water Framework Directive and subsequent legislation.

5.2 Agriculture policy

“If we do not integrate agricultural policy into the operation of basin planning there is no question that the process will be a failure. Agricultural policy is one of the tools that allow river basin planning to work. Therefore basin planning must consider how agricultural policy delivers environmental improvement and agricultural policy must consider how basin planning can help to deliver its objectives. The two naturally come together”

SEPA evidence to Transport and Environment Committee Inquiry into Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Bill, 25th September 2002

Flood defence for farmland has been a major element of agricultural land use policy. Many rivers have been canalised and embanked; drainage and inappropriate grazing regimes associated with intensive farming have contributed to the loss of floodplain wetlands and resulted in long-term damage and drying out of habitats such as lowland raised bogs. Such management continues to be a major factor in preventing the natural sponge-like functioning of floodplains throughout Scotland.

However, agricultural policy is changing and the emphasis is increasingly on diversity, the delivery of public benefits and environmental enhancement. Where floodbanks are protecting marginally viable farmland - and even higher quality land - decisions need to be based on whether current farming practices are genuinely providing the widest benefits from that land or whether the public interest would be better served by a change in agricultural management.

31 the Government should take action to encourage [farm flood management]. In particular future environmental schemes…….should include water management as an option for support. In the same way, the Government should ensure that land management responses to flooding are eligible for funding from flood management budgets alongside more traditional methods of flood defences. The issue of land management options will be aided by a rapid shift to whole catchment planning and away from the current system. The farming industry should look to embrace water management as a viable `alternative crop’.21

The Curry Report, 2002

5.2.1 Floodplain management There is evidently much potential for environmentally sensitive flood alleviation on agricultural land, but the cost of reversion to wetland can be considerable given that any flood prone areas are often highly productive arable land. In addition, the presence of flood banks tends to reduce the scope for the uptake of floodplain management measures. Such hurdles need to be addressed. In particular, the economic benefits of using floodplain wetlands for flood alleviation needs to be built into the payment levels for farmers and landowners to make this a viable option.

The attitudes and motivation of farmers and land managers is obviously critical to implementing sustainable flood management. To encourage this there is a pressing need for appropriate and targeted incentives to encourage a reversion to more sympathetic, less intensive, agricultural management on floodplains. The Rural Stewardship Scheme includes a floodplain management option, but uptake has been low; Scotland’s inland floodplain extends to some 2,950 km2 22. Under the 2001 and 2002 RSS only 721.74 ha of floodplain is managed on the agreement that flooding will not be prevented, with a management fee of £25/ha per annum to landowners. The annual payments for floodplains in RSS 2001/2002 was £18,043.50. For RSS 2003 only 356.92 ha of floodplain was managed23.

The Executive recently announced additional funding for the RSS, which specifically targets wetland management and associated Biodiversity Action Plan

21 Farming and Food: a sustainable future, Policy Commission on the Future of Farming and Food, 2002 22 Turning the Tide on Flooding, WWF Scotland, 2002 23 SEERAD pers comm

32 species24. RSPB Scotland commented on the Executive’s proposals for changes to agri-environment schemes in Scotland, with specific suggestions for the RSS floodplain management option. We consider that this option is likely to be much more effective for biodiversity if undertaken jointly by a series of neighbouring landowners along a catchment. Joint applications should therefore be actively encouraged to ensure catchment scale management of floodplains. Further creation of wetland areas within the floodplain are highly desirable – this is acknowledged by the additional payment offered but, experience suggests, this is often not applied. Appropriate links should be made to options for management of wet grassland for waders, and for management of wetland, as similar management will be required.

5.2.2 Agriculture and the Water Framework Directive The European Commission is particularly aware of the need to “promote joined up thinking” between agriculture and water policy and has issued a working document to highlight the links between the Common Agricultural Policy and the WFD25. The damage caused to important wetland habitats and species by land drainage is highlighted as an issue which must be addressed. Indeed, the need to protect wetlands and the need for land and particular land management to prevent floods are strong themes throughout this paper. The EC insists that Rural Development Programmes will need to be at least partly co-ordinated on river basin level – and aligned with River Basin Management Plans to ensure close co-operation between competent and responsible authorities. This means that representatives from authorities in charge of rural development planning need to be represented in the river basin authorities and vice versa. Equally, members of the rural development programmes may become part of the programme of measures under the WFD or vice versa.

The EC paper points out synergies from CAP and WFD – for example the monitoring of water bodies, as regulated by the WFD will be beneficial for the water and agricultural sectors. The lists of areas protected under Community legislation for the conservation of habitats and species directly dependent on water (Annex IV WFD) will allow better targeting of measures under the Rural Development Regulation.

It recognises that changes in land use and management, particularly a switch from arable to grassland management, may be required in order to meet the

24 New funding for green farming, Scottish Executive press release, 2/7/03 25 Working Document. The Water Framework Directive (WFD) and tools within the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) to support its implementation, European Commission, Brussels, 7/2/03

33 environmental objectives required by the WFD. Further, that supplementary measures within RBMPs programme of measures might include the restoration of previous watercourse flow patters, the establishment of buffer strips, and the recreation and restoration of wetland areas.

Of all the tools of the CAP, agri-environment seems the most useful for helping implement the WFD. Therefore in the next financing period Member States should provide for specific agri-environmental measures to support the objectives of the WFD. In addition, Member States need to allocate sufficient funding to this issue to meet the requirements of the implementation of the WFD. Specific measures could be target protection/restoration of wetlands re-instate good hydromorphological status of surface waters

EC WFD/CAP paper25

Given this background it is strange that the WFD is not explicitly included in the list of Directives to be adhered to in ’Good Agricultural and Environmental Condition’ – the cross-compliance part of the CAP reform package. This link needs to be made.

5.2.3 Changing Scottish agricultural policy A Forward Strategy for Scottish Agriculture26 states that the priority for the future of agri-environment policy in Scotland is finding ways to benefit the three elements of sustainable development – economic, social and environmental. It specifically recognises that this requires an integrated approach to agriculture and environment policy – “This effort needs to start at the top and so the Executive and its agencies are committing themselves to using joined-up principles when dealing with agriculture / environment issues in future”. It notes that in implementing EC legislation, such as the WFD, the Executive will work closely with the agricultural industry in designing measures that suit Scottish circumstances and which take account of the practicalities of farming as well as the risks of environmental damage. A sustainable approach to flood management must surely fit this bill, and the increase in funding for agri-environment schemes – from £22 million in 2001 to £37 million by 2006 should help this to happen.

26 A Forward Strategy for Scottish Agriculture, Scottish Executive, August 2001

34 The Agriculture and Environment Working Group set up as a result of the Forward Strategy develops this thinking in a report entitled Custodians of Change27. This report recognises that agriculture has the potential to deliver widespread environmental benefits as no other industry can – including “mediating flooding, enhancing habitats and the diversity of wildlife”. The report concludes that the most important driver for Scottish agriculture in the near term is the WFD which represents a fundamentally different approach to environmental protection. Custodians of Change promises a vision where “the whole community of Scotland should be able to expect a vibrant, sustainable, prosperous agriculture, confident in its future, responsive to public concerns and supported by government policy in its delivery of good safe food and a high quality environment”. In achieving this aim it commits to “integrated policy development and implementation by the Scottish Executive’s Environment and Rural Affairs Department (SEERAD) and all the relevant agencies at a national and regional level”. An integrated approach between the Executive’s agriculture, development, engineering and water teams, as well as with local authorities and SEPA is indeed essential if sustainable flood management is to be achieved.

Important recommendations from the report include:

The Executive, its agencies, local authorities and the agricultural industry should focus attention upon, and allocate sufficient resources to ensure that a fully integrated approach to natural heritage and land management is promulgated. In particular, attention will need to be given to implementing Local Biodiversity Action Plans (LBAPs); Scottish Natural Heritage’s (SNH) Natural Heritage Futures programme and the production of LBAPs provide a sound basis for the protection and enhancement of biodiversity, but greater emphasis should be given to the creation of ecological networks and the generation of co-operative action at a bio-regional or catchment scale; The impacts of climate change on regional agricultural systems should be examined further, and the potential for agriculture to reduce the magnitude of climate change, and its local effects should be researched. Agricultural policy, support payments, agri-environment schemes and codes of best practice should be amended in the light of this research to require a co-operative response; The RSS should be re-designed to incorporate the widest possible definition of environmental works to include…….hydrological management; and

27 Custodians of Change, Report of the Agriculture and the Environment Working Group, 2002

35 Research should be undertaken on…sustainable farm drainage and farm wetlands;…..the implications of climate change for agricultural systems.

5.2.4 Possible delivery mechanisms In the longer term the proposal to develop Land Management Contracts (LMCs) with explicit payments for the production of public goods could allow sustainable flood management to be delivered through agricultural policy.

Further, the modulation of funding into the Rural Development Regulation offers the potential for large scale integrated floodplain management, but only if sufficient monies are diverted from traditional agriculture support towards the provision of public goods.

These concepts continue to be explored, but remain unresolved at present.

5.3 Forestry The extensive and inappropriate planting of conifers in the 1980s created environmental problems such as siltation and increased acidification of watercourses. This contributed to lower water quality, declining fish stocks, habitat loss and damage to peat bogs in many catchments.

5.3.1 Guidance and standards Concerns over such problems led the GB Forestry Commission and Northern Ireland Forest Service to produce the UK Forests & Water Guidelines in 1988. These guidelines detail changes to forest design and management, for example altering drainage and introducing silt traps. The guidelines have been updated three times, with the latest edition due to be issued in 200328. The water guidelines are now part of the UK Forestry Standard29 which forest operations, such as planting and felling, by all public and private woodland owners are required to meet. The new Scottish Forestry Grant Scheme – introduced in 2003 – requires compliance with these guidelines.

The UK Woodland Assurance Standard (UKWAS) – a voluntary externally audited sustainable forest management standard – requires all UKWAS certified forest owners to carry out works to the UK Forest & Water Guidelines. UKWAS is the UK’s version of the internationally recognised Forest Stewardship Council

28 Forestry Commission (2000) Forests & Water Guidelines. 3rd Edition. Forestry Commission, Edinburgh. NB 4th Edition due 2003 29 Forestry Commission &DANI (1998) The UK Forestry Standard – the Government’s approach to sustainable forestry. Forestry Commission, Edinburgh & DANI Forest Service, Belfast.

36 (FSC) compliant standard. The Scottish national forest estate, run by Forestry Commission Scotland, is UKWAS certified. The Scottish Executive has made a commitment to increase UKWAS certification to 60% of woodland by 200730.

The Environmental Impact Assessment (Forestry) (Scotland) Regulations 199931 require forest owners to consider the impact of forestry works on water quality when planning tree planting or felling, for projects on sensitive sites – Forestry Commission Scotland is the competent authority. These regulations are used for habitat restoration projects, for example deforestation from priority bog habitat in the Flow Country.

FC Scotland has a major role to play in contributing to sustainable flood management. The Scottish Forestry Strategy32 stipulates that forest planning, design and management must be in accordance with the UK Forestry Standard. Proposals to regionalise the national strategy33 should complement the new RBMP system. The ongoing move towards better forestry practice offers the opportunity to improve water quality and drive the expansion and condition improvement of wet woodlands – a priority BAP habitat with a valuable role in flood attenuation.

5.4 Deer management Deer numbers in Scotland are at record levels and continue to rise34. The upper catchments of most Scottish rivers are largely bare of semi natural woodland and exposed to high levels of grazing by deer. Heavy grazing and trampling has accelerated soil erosion in upland Scotland and resulted in widespread loss of native woodland, upland heaths and mires – habitats which would normally help soak up rainfall in the upper parts of catchments.

Heavy grazing in the immediate riparian zone (up to 30m from a water course) can adversely affect water quality as well as causing erosion of riverbanks leading to unnaturally wide and shallow watercourses. At times of high rainfall river systems lacking natural woodlands are more “flashy” with increased

30 See: UK Forest Partnership for Action (2002) UK Forest Partnership for Action. September 2002, Forestry Commission, Edinburgh. 31 The Environmental Impact Assessment (Forestry) (Scotland) Regulations 1999 [SI 1999/43]. 32 Scottish Executive/Forestry Commission. (2000) Forests for Scotland – the Scottish Forestry Strategy, Forestry Commission, Edinburgh. 33 Forestry Commission (2003) New Voices for Scotland’s Forests. News Release 6395, 10 November 2003, Forestry Commission, Edinburgh. 34 Impacts of Wild Deer in Scotland – How Fares the Public Interest? JF Hunt, Report for WWF Scotland and RSPB Scotland, 2003

37 run-off leading to greater risk of flooding downstream. These problems have been recognised in the River Tweed catchment where substantial public funds are being directed at habitat improvement along watercourses through fencing, native tree planting and other measures. Reductions of deer numbers in many of these areas would be highly desirable to restore stability to the upper catchment and help reduce the risk of flooding downstream.

It is anticipated that the requirement of the WFD to maintain watercourses in favourable status should have positive implications for the grazing management of water margins. A major reduction in deer numbers is needed to achieve more sustainable management of upper catchments.

5.5 Biodiversity Action Plans and the Scottish Biodiversity Strategy Scotland’s freshwater resource includes some 28,000 standing waters and over 50,000 km of flowing waters. Lochs and rivers provide habitats for threatened species such as the Atlantic salmon, the freshwater pearl mussel, the osprey and water vole. Ponds and pools support the rare medicinal leech, northern blue damselfly and great crested newt. Blanket bogs represent perhaps 1/7th of the world resource, supporting a rich diversity of invertebrates and breeding waders such as greenshank, dunlin and golden plover, and Scotland retains one of the richest surviving European concentrations of raised bog. However, apart from the Insh marshes in Strathspey (the UKs largest continuous area of base poor fen) Scotland’s wetlands are generally relatively small remnant habitats compared with our rivers and lochs.

Designing wetlands into flood management schemes is an opportunity to reverse the decline, and achieve targets set in national and local Biodiversity Action Plans for vulnerable species and habitats. The restoration of riverine floodplains will provide habitat for farmland waders and wildfowl including redshank, curlew, snipe, wigeon, teal, mallard and pintail.

Scotland is a nation where the conservation and enhancement of biodiversity underpins all decision making and practice to ensure the environment is sustained for its people

Scottish Biodiversity Forum35

35 Towards a strategy for Scotland’s biodiversity: Biodiversity Matters! Scottish Executive Environment Group, February 2003

38 Biodiversity Matters!35 – a strategy being developed at the request of the Deputy Minister for the Environment, aims to facilitate “real change” on the ground to conserve and enhance Scotland’s biodiversity. In so doing, “biodiversity must become more central, to Scotland’s sustainable development agenda and should be utilised as a fundamental measure of its success”. The draft strategy proposals recognise that there will inevitably be difficult decisions, but they should be based on the best available knowledge and should seek out synergies between environmental, economic and social gains and objectives. Sustainable flood management is a fine example of this.

Biodiversity matters! Strategy principles: Manage Scotland’s use of resources in a way that considers the natural functioning of ecosystems so their future health is maintained and enhanced. Develop integrated public policies and strategies that further the conservation and sustainable use of natural resources. Cultivate an appreciation of the social and economic benefits of a healthy biodiversity resource

The draft strategy proposals make the link between sustainable flood management and good ecological status. It also recognises that the functioning of wetland habitats can contribute towards the environmental objectives set out in the RBMPs programme of measures for healthy rivers and lochs.

39 The EU WFD….will give Scotland the opportunity to promote sustainable use of our natural water resources through catchment management. Targets for water quality will be based not only on the chemical composition of the water but also on its biodiversity……..Agri-environment schemes will continue to play an important role in the re-establishment of riparian vegetation and the creation of artificial wetlands. Many species are reliant upon this habitat and the restoration and re-creation of wetlands and their sustainable management will be vital to the future of these species and others further along the food chain.

Increasingly we recognise the importance of wetland systems in regulating flooding and erosion…..a more natural approach to managing rivers; avoiding artificial culverts and straightening; and re-creating natural floodplains, to reduce downstream flood risk in urban areas. These measures will provide valuable wildlife habitat as well as being economically positive.

Biodiversity Matters! strategy proposals

The draft strategy has been criticised for containing no specific actions to achieve its aims. Strategy Implementation Groups, set up by the Scottish Biodiversity Forum, are currently developing specific and measurable actions to be published in May 2004.

5.5.1 New legislation for biodiversity The new Nature Conservation (Scotland) Bill36 gives significant legislative backing to the widespread promotion of biodiversity:

It is the duty of every public body and office holder, in exercising functions, to further the conservation of biodiversity so far as is consistent with the proper exercise of those functions

Part 1, S.1. (1) Nature Conservation (Scotland) Bill, 2003

The Bill also states that Ministers may publish a Scottish Biodiversity Strategy, and produce a report within 3 years of this.

36 Nature Conservation (Scotland) Bill, 2003

40 The Scottish Ministers may designate as the Scottish Biodiversity Strategy one or more strategies for the conservation of biodiversity

Part 1 S.2. (1) Nature Conservation (Scotland) Bill, 2003

It is imperative that the Scottish Biodiversity Strategy introduces actions to achieve the necessary changes in land and water management, linking to the objectives in UK Biodiversity Action Plans.

5.5.2 Scottish Natural Heritage and Natural Heritage Futures SNH Natural Heritage Futures paper for Freshwaters37 highlights the growing awareness in Scotland of the value of our freshwaters and wetlands and their vulnerability to damage. It recognises the impetus for restoration and better management based on native freshwater biodiversity from the implementation of the WFD: “Developing flood alleviation options which seek to work with natural processes, rather than against them, may in the long term prove less expensive overall, and may offer significant natural heritage benefits.” The vision presented by SNH (below) represents a state to which we should aspire – but the changes in policy, management and funding which are necessary to achieve this must be vigorously pursued.

37 Natural Heritage Futures paper, Fresh Waters, SNH, 2002

41 SNH’s vision for freshwater management: The use and management of freshwaters and wetlands operates on the principles of sustainable development. Fresh waters are managed as ecosystems……Great emphasis is placed on the products and services provided by healthy freshwater ecosystems and their fringing habitats, and the maintenance of these resources is ensured by a high degree of public awareness, supported by appropriate regulation. …Land and water use are co- ordinated through individual catchment initiatives, developed from strong community and stakeholder involvement, with effective allocation of water use within and between sectors. There are close links between land-based plans, catchment plans and the River Basin Management Plans established under the WFD. Scotland provides a best practice model for integrated water management policy and practice within the EU, demonstrating the social, economic and environmental benefits of such integration.

Several rural floodplains are used for occasional flood storage, supporting use for wet grazing and timber production, enriching landscape character and biodiversity, and reducing the demand for expensive and damaging flood defences. This pattern of land use is coordinated by catchment flood-risk management strategies, supported by incentive payments to those whose land is exposed to flood events. In these floodplains, arable crops tend to be confined to less flood-prone areas on the valley floor and sides, or to fields protected by flood banks set back some distance from the river. Previous drainage activities are reversed to restore water levels in lowland raised bogs, with grazing regimes appropriate to maintaining wetland biodiversity. from Natural Heritage Futures paper: Freshwaters, SNH 2002

42 5.6 Role of the Scottish Environment Protection Agency

“SEPA believes that the bill will deliver major improvements in the environment in Scotland. It will also provide both social and economic benefit ….We are pleased that the bill proposes that SEPA will have a central role in sustainable water resource management….the new controls will for the first time enable management of the whole aquatic environment in Scotland. SEPA will no longer focus on pollution control as the only means of effecting improvement. In future, we will be able to consider the most cost-effective means of bringing about improvement…..a balance between river engineering and pollution control….and close integration with the planning system which has such a huge effect on water quality and quantity. We believe that the bill offers a major contribution to sustainable development in Scotland and we look forward to developing it in partnership with Government, local authorities and all other interested parties”.

SEPA evidence to Transport & Environment Committee, September 2002

SEPA is the competent authority for ensuring implementation of the WFD. Its role will be wide ranging – much more so than under its founding legislation. SEPA will be instrumental in determining the degree to which sustainable flood management occurs, particularly through the way it exercises the following new duties and powers contained in the following sections of the WEWS Act:

Duty to promote sustainable flood management (s2); Responsibility for River Basin and sub basin plans (s10). SEPA must prepare RBMPs which must include a summary of the significant water management issues within the RBD, environmental objectives relating to water bodies, and a Programme of Measures to be applied to achieve these objectives. Statutory consultees include “such persons as appear to SEPA to have an interest in the promotion of sustainable flood management”(s11). This is a huge opportunity to recognise the impact of damaged and mismanaged floodplains and wetland habitats; to ensure that environmental objectives embrace wetlands associated with water bodies; and to ensure that measures which deliver sustainable flood management are adopted; Operating the new control regime for building or engineering works in, or in the vicinity of, any body of inland surface water (s20). SEPA will have a major influential role in determining whether proposed flood

43 defence schemes protect the water environment under this new consent regime; Ensuring cost effective solutions (s2). SEPA must have regard to the social and economic impact of complying with the requirements of the WFD. Putting sustainable flood management into practice offers the opportunity to provide cost effective flood alleviation which will benefit people and wildlife; and Restoration power (s22). Scottish Ministers can make regulations which allow SEPA to undertake active restoration work in order to meet the environmental objectives for water bodies, and recover costs from landowners. It can also require landowners to undertake the restoration works themselves, where restoration is not disproportionately expensive.

5.7 Duty of Scottish Ministers As well as the specific duty on Scottish Ministers to promote sustainable flood management Ministers have the overall duty and responsibility to ensure proper policy integration. This has been reflected in certain changes to land use policy - particularly planning and agriculture - and in the strategies and responsibilities of key sectors and agencies. However, this duty impinges on all government departments and agencies including, for example, business and enterprise companies. More changes are necessary in order to deliver a fully integrated, sustainable land use system.

44 6 Case Studies

This section highlights a number of Scottish catchments, most of which have suffered flooding in urban areas. It outlines possible causes and suggests how more sustainable use of the catchment and its floodplains might help to prevent or attenuate flooding events in the future. Work and initiatives which are already underway in some catchments are outlined. The sketch maps give an indication of search areas, based on relatively low lying ground alongside rivers which may be used to provide sustainable solutions to flooding problems.

6.1 Insh Marshes – a naturally functioning floodplain within Strathspey

“Members of the Transport and Environment Committee were impressed by their visit to Insh Marshes in Strathspey, which was hosted by RSPB Scotland. The Insh marshes are part of the floodplain of the River Spey and are an important haven for wildlife. What is more, if the Spey were constrained from flooding at the Insh marshes, flooding would probably occur in Aviemore. Therefore, the marshes play a natural role in flood control. I urge the Executive to investigate how floodplains can be restored over time to their former natural use where they have been changed by farming practices, and to examine how the environment and rural affairs department can support the farmers and crofters who manage those lands as wetlands, with consequent advantages for flood control and wildlife”

Maureen Macmillan MSP Water Environment and Water Services Bill, Stage 3 debate, 29th January 2003

The Insh Marshes floodplain in Strathspey extends from Kingussie downstream to the Spey/Feshie confluence near Kincraig Bridge. This RSPB reserve is the largest, and most naturally functioning, floodplain mire in Britain, extending to 8 km long and nearly 3 km wide in places. The River Spey meanders through the floodplain and is joined by the fast flowing and dynamic River Feshie. The floodplain regularly floods during winter and spring, holding water after heavy rainfall and from snow melt. It acts as a natural flood defence system with floodwater covering some 1000 ha at a depth of 2 m. This natural sponge prevents extensive flooding to properties and farmland downstream. Flood risk is reduced to settlements including parts of Aviemore, which is an important base for the local tourism economy. The equivalent engineered flood control measures would be very expensive and result in the loss of important wildlife

45 habitat. A rough examination of maps suggests that 7 km of flood defence banks might be needed to defend Aviemore.

The floodplain has massive conservation value, with numerous internationally and nationally important designations, including Special Protection Area and National Nature Reserve. It is renowned for the number and variety of breeding waders (over 1,000 pairs), wildfowl (over 50% of the UK goldeneye population), spotted crakes, populations of wintering whooper swans and hen harriers and a rich diversity of plants and invertebrates. The management of Insh Marshes RSPB reserve helps deliver many of the national and local Biodiversity Action Plan targets.

As well as its value for flood defence and for wildlife, the Insh Marshes contributes significantly to the local economy. It attracts many visitors who contribute to tourism and supports visitor attractions such as the RSPB reserve and the Loch Insh Watersports centre as well as recreational pursuits such as fishing, walking and cycling.

The River Spey Catchment Management Plan (CMP)38 recognises that there may be scope in other areas of the catchment for allowing land which is prone to periodic inundation to revert to wetland. Whilst recognising the sensitivities of allowing a floodplain to revert, it recommends that a strategic vision for flood management at the catchment or sub-catchment scale should be developed.

Spey CMP Management Objective 7.1: to promote, through existing or new agri-environment and other schemes, agricultural practices which benefit water quality and riparian and wetland habitats.

The CMP is highly critical of the effectiveness of current agri-environment schemes, which it claims are hindering sustainable management of the floodplain. It notes that the Cairngorms Straths Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) and the Rural Stewardship Scheme (RSS) fail to sufficiently support wader habitat enhancement, careful water and nutrient management; further, that the RSS is too inflexible to enable management which is compatible with the aims of integrated catchment management. For example, the `wader management’ option in the RSS cannot be accessed by those already in the ESA without a new

38 River Spey Catchment Management Plan, 2003, Spey Catchment Steering Group

46 application to RSS which may or may not be successful. The ESA ceiling stops additional positive management being carried out, yet the RSS may be out of reach to top up the ESA payment. Further, the RSS points system precludes the vast majority of riparian habitats within the catchment. The CMP recognises that this must be addressed – “support for any environmental protection and enhancement must be sufficient to encourage farmers and crofters to participate and co-operate in the implementation of the CMP”.

Grantown -on-Spey

A95

River Nethy Aviemore

Loch Towns Insh Rivers Kingussie Lochs Insh Marshes River Spey Marsh River River Feshie A86 A9 Tromie Major roads

Search area

Reproduced from the digital Ordnance Survey map by permission of Ordnance Survey® on behalf of The Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office, All rights reserved. ©Crow n Copyright. RSPB Licence AL100026659.

Potential for more sustainable flood management in Strathspey NB – search area denotes relatively low lying land

47

6.2 The Greater Clyde (South) Glasgow is the fourth most “at-risk” city in the UK for flooding. 1.8 million people live in the catchment of the River Clyde. The Scottish Executive estimates that 23,000 properties are at risk from a major river flood and another 23,000 at risk from a tidal flood of the Clyde39.

The River Clyde flows for about 100 miles, from its source in the Southern Uplands into the Firth of Clyde at Glasgow. Its shape, capacity and water quality has been much altered as a result of industrial development and farming activity throughout its catchment. Since 1780 there has been an average of one major flood event per decade. In recent times we have seen widespread flooding; in 1994, 1985 and 1977. River flows during the 1994 floods were out of bank at Daldowie for more that 48 hours. It has been calculated that a floodplain of 182 km2 filled with water to a depth of 0.3 m - approximately 10% of the total Clyde catchment - would be required to store this water40. Improved flood storage on the floodplains of the Clyde and its tributaries could contribute to this.

There is now a new impetus to regenerate the lower reaches of the river, fuelled by large commercial and residential developments. Recent work undertaken on behalf of Glasgow City Council estimates that 15 km of flood walls and embankments, between 0.75 and 1.75 m above the height of existing quay walls, would be required to protect the city against a 1 in 100 chance river flood coupled with a 1 in 200 chance tidal flood in any year. Such work is estimated to cost up to £40 million – this one scheme would swallow up the whole of the Executive’s flood defence budget until 2005. Major engineering works, including the construction of a Clyde barrage, are being considered, but more cost-effective, sustainable solutions, such as those outlined below, should be sought to protect Glasgow and other built up areas within the catchment.

6.2.1 The White Cart Glasgow City Council has recently instigated the White Cart Water Project – this aims to create an environmentally sustainable flood prevention scheme to mitigate the risk of flooding from the White Cart Water in the south of Glasgow.

39 Turning the Tide on Flooding, WWF report, 2002

48 Work undertaken to date concludes that it will be appropriate to reduce flood potential by the temporary storage of floodwater in the upstream catchment in conjunction with the modest construction or raising of river corridor walls through the urban area. In identifying the best solution the City Council is seeking an environmentally robust approach, utilising soft engineering where possible and practicable to reduce flood risk.

A feasibility study has indicated a number of potential sites within the catchment, on the Earn Water, White Cart and Kittoch Water, for further investigation as temporary floodwater storage locations. Subsequent hydraulic analysis has identified suitable solutions which would attenuate the 1 in 200 year-peak flow. A number of factors are currently being examined in more detail in order to promote a single scheme, including functionality, cost-effectiveness and environmental enhancement.

Benefit-cost analysis has been carried out, as required by the Scottish Executive where a flood prevention scheme is part financed by grant assistance. Benefits have been assessed by calculating the damages that will be sustained if the flood prevention scheme is not implemented. This was conservatively estimated at £41,874,000 in 200240. It clearly makes economic sense on this basis alone, but it seems that environmental benefits - e.g. to biodiversity and recreation - were not factored into this assessment.

The potential for environmental enhancement considers habitat diversification - notably the creation or enhancement of areas of wet grassland, and improved riparian management. Options such as the re-meandering of straightened watercourses and re-profiling of riverbanks are also under consideration, but the extent to which such proactive habitat creation and enhancement occurs will determine how sustainable this scheme will really be.

RSPB Scotland welcomes the efforts being made to ensure sustainable solutions, but considers that there is much scope for creating wetland areas which maximise biodiversity, rather than simply providing short-term storage ponds. More consideration needs to be given to the design of the flood storage area in order to maximise its value, and to help deliver the environmental objectives of the WFD.

40 WAFairhurst, Technical Report, 2002

49 6.2.2 Lochwinnoch: The Three Lochs Project The “Three Lochs” – Kilbirnie, Barr and Castle Semple – form one of the largest tracts of water in south-west Scotland with a catchment area of over 800 ha. The River Calder rises in the Renfrewshire hills and flows into Castle Semple; the Black Cart water flows from the north of Castle Semple loch to its confluence with the White Cart, approximately 1 km before it joins the River Clyde. The Black Cart and its upstream tributaries form the main drainage system for a large proportion of the Renfrewshire hills. These hills experience relatively high rainfall for central Scotland – approximately 2000 mm per annum, and this combined with the extensive catchment area results in a large volume of surface runoff passing through Castle Semple loch and into the Black Cart. Flood flows in the Black Cart are lower than might be expected for such a catchment area and rainfall, due to the attenuation provided by Castle Semple, Barr and Kilbirnie Lochs. However, local flooding of the Black Cart is still an issue, especially in the Johnstone and Linwood areas of Renfrewshire.

In the wider catchment, Paisley has experienced some extreme flood events, most recently in 1994. This resulted in a £1 million initiative, the Moredun Playing Field Flood Prevention Scheme, which is designed to use natural flood storage capacity allowing six million gallons of water to be re-directed and stored before being slowly released into the Espedair Burn. It is expected that the measures would be used on average once every seven years.

RSPB’s Lochwinnoch nature reserve lies within the floodplain between Kilbirnie and Castle Semple lochs. The area has been subject to intervention and management over the last 250 years. In the 1800s the Barr Loch was drained and managed as seasonally flooded water meadow. Aerial photographs show that the Barr Meadow remained as seasonally flooded wetland until the failure of the sluice gates in 1946, since when the Barr Loch has been permanently inundated. The construction of Elliston Weir downstream of Castle Semple during the 1970s has resulted in higher water levels within the floodplain. The subsequent breaching of earth embankments surrounding the Barr Loch has led to a lack of hydrological control and the inability to manage water levels for wildlife or flood storage. This area supported much wildlife whilst functioning as a seasonally flooded wetland, but its biodiversity declined on becoming a shallow eutrophic loch.

50 In 1998 RSPB Scotland commissioned a feasibility study on the control of water levels in the Barr Loch and Aird meadow41. The study recommended a tailored water level management strategy which would support seasonal habitat requirements and provide flood storage. It also recommended the development of a floodplain-wide habitat management study.

In 2001, Renfrewshire Council commissioned the initial phase of a report investigating the feasibility of returning the Barr Loch to seasonally flooded wetland. This should allow the peak to be taken off flood events, as well as provide significant habitat improvements. It is estimated that some 450 ha, including the loch, improved grassland and unimproved grassland could be available for floodwater storage and subsequent slow release of water42. The second stage of this project is now being initiated by RSPB Scotland in order to determine the optimal management for flood storage and habitat creation.

Towns

Black Cart River Clyde Rivers Glasgow Lochs M8 River Johnstone Calder Major roads Paisley Search area

Lochwinnoch Barrhead

Three Lochs

White East Beith Cart Kilbride

A737

Catchment of River A77 Garnock

Reproduced from the digital Ordnance Survey map by permission of Ordnance Survey® on behalf of The Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office, All rights reserved. ©Crow n Copyright. RSPB Licence AL100026659.

Potential for sustainable flood management in the Greater Clyde (south) NB search area denotes relatively low lying ground

41 Macdata 1998, Feasibility study on the control of water levels in the Barr Loch and Aird Meadow at RSPB Lochwinnoch. Report to RSPB 42 RSPB, pers comm

51 6.3 Strathearn, Perthshire A simple example, replicated throughout Scotland, of a river which is prevented from functioning naturally during flood events, the River Earn is effectively isolated from its extensive floodplain by earth embankments which protect productive agricultural land. This has exacerbated flooding problems in Bridge of Earn as floodwater is channelled rapidly downstream, rather than being allowed to overspill onto the surrounding land then slowly released once the flood peak has passed.

Less intensive agricultural use of the floodplain, along with removal of the existing embankments, would allow major floodwater storage during flood events, and considerable opportunity for environmental enhancement. However, incentives would have to be sufficiently attractive for farmers to allow such a change to occur. Payment levels would need to reflect the use of land for flood alleviation - thereby providing a public good for people who would benefit. Current agricultural incentives are usually insufficient to allow such large scale change, even if the farmer or landowner is sympathetic.

The Strathearn floodplain also demonstrates the need for groups of landowners to co-operate over a wide area to effect sustainable flood management: there is little point in one farmer carrying out floodplain management in isolation. This needs to be recognised and promoted in agri-environment schemes and River Basin Management Plans.

52 Perth A85 Crieff

Loch Earn Comrie River Earn Bridge of Earn

M90 Towns A9

Rivers

Lochs

Major roads

Search area

Reproduced from the digital Ordnance Survey map by permission of Ordnance Survey® on behalf of The Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office, All rights reserved. ©Crow n Copyright. RSPB Licence AL100026659.

Potential for sustainable flood management in Strathearn NB – search area denotes relatively low lying ground

53 6.4 Moray Communities A number of communities in Moray have suffered severe flooding in recent years, notably Forres, Elgin and Llanbryde. In 1997 the lowlands bordering the southern shore of the Moray Firth were severely affected. More than 1200 people were evacuated from over 400 homes and agricultural land was extensively inundated. The Moray Council established the Moray Flood Alleviation Group, a partnership between the Council and Posford Haskonig Consultant Engineers, in 2001 to address this problem. Design of flood alleviation works for Lhanbryde commenced in winter 2001 with design work at Elgin and Forres following in summer 2002. Notably, there is recognition that the design process will need to examine “the sustainability of the schemes and the long-term maintenance and operation of the works”43 – however, the extent to which sustainable flood management will be achieved is in question. The major shift towards soft engineering and changing land use does not appear to have been made in the proposed solutions.

6.4.1 Forres The Forres Flood Alleviation scheme aims to provide flood protection from the River Findhorn, Burn of Mosset and the Rafford Burn. The Group has completed a historic review of flooding in this area, an analysis of climate change, flood frequency estimation work, hydraulic modelling and flood risk mapping. A variety of hard and soft-engineered options for flood alleviation were identified and consulted on during February 2003.

RSPB Scotland welcomed the identification of soft-engineered solutions amongst the solutions, though notes the predominance of hard-engineered options. We commented on the proposals, favouring a combination of flood storage at Chapleton, together with river restoration there and at Sanquhar Mains. This offers the opportunity to create a large floodplain wetland, allowing water storage in times of flood with additional value as a marshy area at all times of year. In our comments to the Moray Flood Alleviation Group we suggested that the existing man-made low flood banks are removed, allowing natural meanders to develop. Such measures would alleviate flooding whilst meeting local and national biodiversity targets. Wet woodland/riparian woodland is a target habitat for restoration under the Northeast Scotland Local Biodiversity Action Plan, along with the Government’s commitment for floodplain restoration under the UK Biodiversity Action Plan.

43 from website www.morayflooding.org

54 6.4.2 Elgin Elgin has a well documented history of flooding, with five significant flood events in the last century. The construction of flood defences in the area has been undertaken by a variety of landowners, local authorities, local residents and occupants of industrial premises. Their construction appears to have been carried out on an ad-hoc basis with a lack of strategic catchment planning and poor commitment to their maintenance.

The Moray Flood Alleviation Group identified three different strategies for Elgin which were the subject of public consultation in 2003. All strategies are based on hard-engineered options – construction of a major tunnel to divert flow, major embankment work or construction of upstream reservoirs. Unfortunately, the use of natural floodplains upstream of Elgin does not appear to feature in any of the proposed solutions. RSPB Scotland commented on this and encouraged more sustainable solutions to be adopted in the implementation of any flood alleviation scheme for Elgin.

Towns

Rivers

Major roads Elgin

Search area A96 Lhanbryde

Forres

River Lossie A941 River Findhorn

A940 River Spey

Reproduced from the digital Ordnance Survey map by permission of Ordnance Survey® on behalf of The Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office, All rights reserved. ©Crow n Copyright. RSPB Licence AL100026659.

Potential for sustainable flood management in Moray NB – search area denotes relatively low lying ground

55 7 Conclusions

Flood risk is real and increasing in Scotland, but the public interest is not best served by our current reactive approach to flooding. We need to shift from defending against flooding to managing the risk. A strategic catchment based approach which values the role of natural floodplains and wetland habitats can provide a social, economic and environmentally beneficial solution to flooding problems.

New legislation to implement the EU Water Framework Directive provides a major opportunity to change the way we tackle flooding. The Water Environment and Water Service Act (Scotland) 2003 includes a duty on Scottish Ministers, SEPA and responsible authorities to promote sustainable flood management.

Adopting a more sustainable approach to flood management will help achieve the environmental objectives set to protect the water environment in River Basin Management Plans in a cost-effective way.

Though the benefits of a more sustainable approach to flooding are increasingly recognised certain elements of land use policy and funding mechanisms need to change to ensure widespread implementation.

In Scotland a number of recent flood alleviation schemes promote a more sustainable approach to flood management, but hard-engineered schemes continue to dominate.

56 8 Recommendations

Responsibilities ensure that the new National Technical Advisory Group (NTAG) on flooding promotes sustainable flood management, reflecting the duty in the WEWS Act. Action Scottish Executive; ensure that implementation of legislation governing land management, e.g. forestry/deer, prevents bad practice which could exacerbate poor flood management. Action Scottish Executive; ensure protection of the water environment through the new control regime for building or engineering works in, or in the vicinity of, any body of inland surface water. Action SEPA.

Policy Integration promote a strategic catchment based approach to managing flood risk acknowledging the benefits of working with natural processes. Action Scottish Executive, local authorities, SEPA, NTAG; introduce new guidance on the design and economic assessment of flood alleviation schemes44 which encourages more sustainable, non-structural approaches to flood alleviation. Action Scottish Executive, NTAG; ensure local authorities awareness of new duty to consider flood management in RBMPs. Action Scottish Executive, NTAG; advise local authorities and others on sustainable flood management. Action NTAG; set joint objectives for farming and flood defence through the creation and management of floodplain wetlands. Action Scottish Executive.

River Basin Management Plans/sub-basin plans include an inventory of the entire wetland resource within the plan area, including sites of local, national and European importance. Action SEPA; assess the role, functions and values of each wetland in achieving ‘good status’ for water bodies. Action SEPA, SNIFFER; identify the pressures and impacts on wetlands and the consequences within the plan area, including ability to function as floodwater storage. Action SEPA; promote sustainable flood management measures, including the restoration of previous watercourse flow patterns, the establishment of buffer strips, and the recreation and restoration of wetland areas within Programmes of

44 promised by Scottish Executive in NFF by Sept 2004

57 Measures, to help achieve the environmental objectives of associated water bodies. Action SEPA; ensure that the economic analysis of water use incorporates the value of services provided by wetlands, including flood alleviation. Action SEPA; ensure that RBMPs/sub-basin plans address flooding issues. Action Scottish Ministers, SEPA; provide strategic forum for those interested in flood management. Action SEPA, local authorities, stakeholders; use EU wetland guidance currently being developed to help define role of wetlands in RBMPs. Action SEPA.

Funding direct funding towards schemes which promote sustainable flood management when considering grant applications for flood defence. Action Scottish Ministers, Scottish Executive; base appraisal of flood schemes on economic efficiency (multi-functional benefits) rather than cheapest possible option. Action Scottish Ministers, Local Authorities; promote the expansion and restoration of floodplain habitats through better funded agricultural grant schemes, e.g. RSS, and management payments which reflect the true socio-economic value of land used for flood alleviation purposes. Action Scottish Executive; ensure proper funding for SEPA to carry out its new WEWS Act duties and responsibilities effectively. Action Scottish Executive.

Research undertake a comprehensive study of the state/use of inland floodplains in Scotland. Action Scottish Executive, SEPA; carry out detailed hydrological survey work to assess extent of floodplains and existing/potential capacity for floodwater storage in catchments prone to urban flooding problems. Action Scottish Executive, SEPA; undertake research to better define wetland functions in achieving environmental objectives - including economic benefits, and develop techniques which promote their use in flood management. Action SNIFFER, Scottish Executive; develop projects which adapt soft-engineering techniques for Scottish rivers. Action Scottish Executive, SEPA, local authorities.

58 Public awareness / education promote the benefits of sustainable flood management to the public. Action Scottish Executive / local authorities; ensure that training for key professions includes an understanding of natural freshwater processes, and of the social and economic aspects of water uses. Action engineers / planners.

59 9 Glossary

basic measures the minimum requirements to be complied within the programme of measures required by Article 11 of the WFD.

ecological status an expression of the quality of the structure and functioning of aquatic ecosystems.

environmental objectives the objectives set out in Article 4 of the WFD, which aim to prevent deterioration of, protect, enhance and restore the water environment.

floodplain area of flat land alongside a river which, under natural conditions, floods during times of high flow.

good status describes the status achieved by a water body when its ecological status, and chemical status are at least `good’.

programme of measures a plan of action for each RBD, set out within the RBMP, in order to achieve the environmental objectives.

river basin district (RBD) the area of land and sea, made up of one or more neighbouring river basins together with associated groundwaters and coastal waters, identified as the main unit for the management of river basins. There will be one RBD for the majority of Scotland, and one for cross border catchments.

river basin management plan (RBMP) required for each RBD, containing detailed analysis of the water environment and programme of measures.

sub-basin part of a RBD based on river catchment(s). supplementary measures measures designed to achieve the objectives in Article 4 of the WFD, which may be adopted as part of the programme of measures. May include the recreation and restoration of wetlands areas (WFD Annex VI, part B vii).

60 sustainable flood management adopting the following elements to tackle the risk of flooding: a strategic, catchment based approach; protecting and using natural systems; and promoting soft engineering techniques. washland an area of low lying ground next to a river used to temporarily store water during times of peak flows. Washlands have the potential to be managed entirely, or in part, as wetlands, though may be dry for much of the time depending on the nature of the flooding regime.

wetland an area of ground, the ecological, chemical and hydrological characteristics of which are attributable to frequent inundation or saturation by water and which is directly dependent, with regard to its water needs, on a body of groundwater or a body of surface water. Wetland habitats include wet grassland, marsh, fen, blanket bog, raised bog, saltmarsh.

61 10 Abbreviations

BAP Biodiversity Action Plan CAP Common Agriculture Policy LBAP Local Biodiversity Action Plan NFF National Flooding Framework NTAG National Technical Advisory Group RBD River Basin District RBMP River Basin Management Plan SEERAD Scottish Executive Environment and Rural Affairs Department SEPA Scottish Environment Protection Agency SPP7 Scottish Planning Policy 7 WEWS Act Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Act 2003 WEWS Bill Water Environment and Water Services Bill WFD Water Framework Directive

62